Both are a priority, but its quite obvious who they are focusing more on. All I'm saying is Israel will deal with Iran differently than the US approach with both NK and Iran. Because of the fear of proxy groups and the actual threats from Iran, which has brought them up in priority for the world as you can see in the news. As I said before, no doubt NK is also dangerous and could sell to the wrong people. They know though, radioactive material is traceable to the source and they will pay the consequences and loose power.
you just don't get it. We are powerless against NK - that's why we do nothing. Bloody hell - in recent history the russians sent 'dirty radioactive material' to london and tracked it all over the westend and north london then put it in a mans tea we did nothing of course.
"Off topic" on: The atmosphere inside and outside the stadium was great, too (around 50,000 Mexicans & 20,000 Iranians in the city on that day). What a party in green/white/red that was! http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/7598/img2857dv.jpg http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/9973/img2882a.jpg http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/1844/img2872x.jpg "Off topic" closed. ... and contributed to the formation of the left "68 movement" in Germany. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PpB2iQcwzk&feature=player_embedded#"]YouTube- EMPHATIC Students protest Shah of Iran Berlin Germany 1967[/ame] [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFuYzhk5He0&feature=related"]YouTube- The Shah from Iran in Berlin (2. June 1967) Demonstration[/ame]
Yep, the US can really afford building a base in a chaotic country. Take care, they are going to invade China soon (after Iran and Russia! Btw: Here's another indication of the Iranian regime's intentions. http://www.tehrantimes.com/index_View.asp?code=214364 And another brave statement of the "bright" Iranian president...
If you asked me a year ago, what the regime intended to do re: the nuclear issue, I woulde have likely state that they were pursuing a Japan model: to build the infrastructure to build a nuclear weapon on short notice but to not actually weaponize...but with the aftermath of the June elections, I think they are going to pursue the North Korea model to consolidate their hold on power.
Their mistake. It seems like everyone in the world recognizes that regime change in Iran will come from within, except for the people in power. And nukes aren't going to help them there...
You are correct that the only way, in Iran, that successful and desirable regime change in the long-run will occur is internally. It definitely needs to be Iranian manufactured. Not US manufactured. Not Israeli manufactured. Not English manufactured. Not Timbuckto manufactured. That said, I do think, if they get a nuke, there is a possiblity that the people will possibly be driven towards the regime rather than their current position. The nuclear weapon brings prestige, safety and status. Given Iranians fierce nationalism, the prestige and status will play heavily in their favor. Given the very bloody nature of the Iran-Iraq war, the safety factor will also come into play.
Very true. But it wouldn't be the new regime that produced it. It will be regarded as an accomplishment of Khamanei and his ilk. I personally think Iran is going to get the bomb...regardless of what the West does practically. IMO, the only way to ensure that the Iran does NOT get a bomb is to invade the country and maintain a strong presence in the country for a long time a la Japan/Germany/Iraq. Whether it's in 10 or 50 years, I don't know...but I think they will eventually get it. Again, that's my opinion.
First of all, I'd feel a lot better with the bomb in the hand of another regime (even though I wouldn't appreciate it) ... and secondly, I can imagine that a democratic regime would have other priorities than badly seeking for the A-bomb and thus risking the danger of a nuclear arms race in Middle East. Bonne nuit.
I think the nuclear arms race is a valid argument. However, I do think there is also the possibility that a nuclear arms race won't happen but rather will seek Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Turkey to seek a defense pact (Tehran essentially providing a nuclear umbrella) for those three states. Now, you say that Arabs and Persians have been rivals..that is certainly true..but this scenario is the most likely scenario IMO IF Israel attacks Iran's nuclear facilities. There is a possibility that Egypt, under pressure of its population, will be forced to withdraw from its peace treaty with Israel. Saudi Arabia currently is "neutral" in the Israel-Arab conflict but certainly sympathetic with the Palestinian cause. I don't see this as likely though given SA's oil resources and its reliance on the US...SA may even try to persuade the US to cut off its ties with Israel (that would be DECISIVE)..not because they love Iran but because it would be seen as the third/fourth attack/invasion on a Muslim country in a decade. More realistically, I don't see a nuclear arms race as definitive largely because Israel's large nuclear arsenal in the 1960's didn't cause Egypt to develop a nuclear weapons program when Egypt had fought three wars and lost against Israel.
Saudi may already have nuclear bombs. The arrangement is for Saudi has missiles that have Pakistan's nukes on them. Saudis have the keys for missiles, and Pakistanis have nuclear keys. This is one way to get nuclear capacity without developing one by your own. It followed the example US puts in Germany.
Well, if the Iranians really don't mind having nuclear weapons in the hands of the current regime, it's their own choice. I just hope they won't regret it one day.
Have you heard of the TV show? This season, season 8, deals pretty much directly with the Iranian issue, particularly the nuclear issue. It concerns a peace between the Islamic republica of Kamistan (ie. which is basically Iran) and the US. And MI-5, another show, in series 6, deals with Iran.
Interesting question. I don't think this is actually questioned sufficinetly. WHat motivates the IRanian leadership re: the nuclear program. The default position is that they want to annhiliate Israel...but I think it may be insecurity vis a vis the United States. IMO, Khamanei has always believed that the US policy re: IRan is regime change and not behaqvior change no matter what Washington says.
Of course it's the fear of the US. Why would you nuke a country in your own back yard annihilating hundreds of thousands of innocents, many of them Muslim which is completely against Koranic teaching knowing full well that the instant and complete destruction of your nation would occur hours later. It's assinine. When we Americans realize that Iran is a friend full of hot chicks and guys that look like Freddy Mercury full of piss and vinegar. They are far more like America than most with bigger issues than we can imagine. Leave them alone.
Did i.e. the Nazis under their crazy & psychopathic leader Hitler ever care for the fate of Germany when they realized that their megalomaniac plan would (thankfully) fail? I don't claim that the current Iranian regime is that crazy ... but when considering its hate for the state of Israel and its religious fundamentalism & dictatorial methods, you have to be cautious. There's quite a difference between the current regime in Tehran and those who are opposing it inside Iran. Obviously you haven't realized that... But I agree with you that the Neo-Cons in Washington (thankfully they are gone) have to take a large part of the blame for the crisis we're facing these days.
You live near Nuremberg. Interesting! We played Mexico there. What would be really interesitng is if Israel played Iran at Nuremberg in 2006.
You know fully well that Iranian athletes usually don't compete with Israeli athletes. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1151766.html